Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 09:44:30 -0500
From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at umn.edu>
Subject: [Regalia] muppets, deserts, dogs, hidden valley
August 30, and discussion of "Hidden Valley" is supposed to begin
today.
I enjoyed reading it a good deal -- in spite of the fact that (like a good
many others) I consider it one of the poorest Oz books. But that still
leaves room for pleasant reading, and it is pleasant. It's nice to have a
story that looks to somewhere other than the Emerald City for help for a
change, and nice to have the Tin Woodman get a central role, as the helper.
Nick hadn't really had a major sympathetic role since "Tin Woodman" --
present in all the stories, but in minor roles. In "Ozoplaning" he had a
major role, but leaning on his readiness to fight so much as to make him
recklessly so. In "Hidden Valley," he's also ready for a fight, but in a
cause more carefully considered, and with a more definable purpose --
getting Terp out of action and the valley returned to the control of those
living there. And it's fun to see the team of the Tin Woodman and the
Scarecrow in action, with their differences of talents, values, textures,
etc. in contrast.
On the negative side, Jam is a colorless character, and Percy, although
colorful enough, seems a bit mechanical in his construction, with things
like his "kiddo" slang over-played. The idea of a Leopard who Changes His
Spots is delightful (Kipling would have been amused), but he doesn't
actually contribute much to the action -- he and the Rhyming Dictionary are
dropped from the party for no real reason (if they're that timid about
encountering Terp in company with the Tin Woodman, they're likely to have
qualms about going off on their own, too). I suppose it wouldn't have done
to take them along, as it would be hard to find anything for them to
contribute to the confrontation, and it wouldn't have done to give them the
obvious motive of leaving to tell Ozma to keep an eye on the situation (even
though they do and she does), because it would undercut some suspense to
know how quickly Jam & co would be bailed out if need be. But just having
them run along isn't a good solution, either.
Ruth Berman

Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2004 22:37:56 -0500
From: "J. L. Bell" <jnolbell at earthlink.net>
Subject: [Regalia] HIDDEN VALLEY echoing
When I reread HIDDEN VALLEY this month, I was struck by a line in
Cosgrove's foreword: "Dorothy, the Scarecrow, the Tin Woodman, and many
other old friends are in this story, for it would not be a true tale of
Oz without them." The "many other old friends" include, most
prominently, the Cowardly Lion and Hungry Tiger. While Ozma and the
Wizard come on at the end and Glinda is mentioned, the travelers
actually seem to avoid alerting those powerful authorities to the danger
of Terp.
Thus, the adventure feels much more like those in the first two Oz
books, without powerful helpers in the Emerald City to call on. And I
kept hearing echoes of WIZARD and of LAND, which Cosgrove says (in her
afterword for the Oz Club edition) was her first and favorite of the
series. This HIDDEN VALLEY seems to resonate a lot.
The book offers long recaps of WIZARD [220-1] and LAND [288-9]. Old
characters also frequently allude to episodes from Baum's other books
[e.g., 81, 110, 258, 292]. Unlike most young American visitors to Oz,
Jam has never heard of the place [37] or its celebrities [80, 104].
That, naturally, lets characters fill him in (and catch up readers as
well). I wonder if these passages appeared in Cosgrove's original
manuscript, or whether Reilly & Lee encouraged her to add them.
But the echoes go well beyond explicit allusions to previous adventures.
They include several close parallels between this adventure and
Dorothy's in WIZARD:
* An American child is lofted into the air, falls asleep, and wakes upon
landing suddenly in Oz. There the child meets "little men" who greet him
as a "noble wizard, or sorcerer" [36]. That's very much like Dorothy's
journey in WIZARD, unlike the trip in any other book. (This is also the
first mention in any Oz book, I believe, of the Gillikins--or
"Gillikens"--being reader-sized. And the Winkies are "similar in
appearance to the Gillikens" except for dress [104], implying Cosgrove
imagined them as small, too.)
* Everyone is scared by the entrance of a jungle cat who turns out to be
harmless, even weepy. The Leopard's predicament leads into four pages of
explicit lesson about the value of being different [129]. At that point
Spots seems to have exhausted his function in the book, so Cosgrove
hustles him off to the Emerald City, as Ruth Berman noted.
* The child agrees, though not knowing how, to vanquish a tyrant who
keeps "slaves" working for him through magic [41]. (The idea of being a
"slave" runs through the book. Jam denies being Terp's slave [45], the
Equinots want to enslave him [67], and the North Wind calls itself
"slave to the snowmen" [198].)
* There are not one but two moments when the Lion and Tiger (and, once,
Leopard) go off into the forest to find food in their own way and come
back licking their chops [187, 261]. There's also a moment like that in
LOST PRINCESS.
* The Scarecrow is unstuffed and then stuffed again [211]. This is
explicitly tied to TIN WOODMAN, but it appears in WIZARD, LAND, and
other Baum books. The Scarecrow also thinks so hard that the needles
poke out of his head [243].
* The party builds a raft (also in PATCHWORK GIRL) and encounters
hostile live trees (also in SCALAWAGONS and others) [221]. Oddly enough,
the Tin Woodman states, "I've never heard of magic wood before" [225].
Sometimes the echoes become even more exact, as I noted in Snow's books.
Take a look at page 138-9, and compare it to chapter 20 in WIZARD when
the travelers mount a wall around what turns out to be the China Country:
************
The Scarecrow climbed up the ladder first, but he was so awkward that
Dorothy had to follow close behind and keep him from falling off. When
he got his head over the top of the wall the Scarecrow said, "Oh,
my!"
"Go on," exclaimed Dorothy.
So the Scarecrow climbed farther up and sat down on the top of the
wall, and Dorothy put her head over and cried, "Oh, my!" just as the Scarecrow had done.
Then Toto came up, and immediately began to bark, but Dorothy made him be still.
The Lion climbed the ladder next, and the Tin Woodman came last; but
both of them cried, "Oh, my!" as soon as they looked over the wall.
When they were all sitting in a row on the top of the wall, they looked
down and saw a strange sight.
****************
And then there are the echoes of scenes in LAND:
* The Scarecrow and Tin Woodman embrace closely on meeting [117].
* A small animal grows to a large size; Percy even plans to compare
notes with Professor Wogglebug [288]. (Baum also explored this theme
with the Frogman in LOST PRINCESS.)
And of other Baum books:
* The Sawhorse quarrels with a new quadruped in the Emerald City [294],
as in DOROTHY & WIZARD, PATCHWORK GIRL, TIK-TOK.
* The arrival from America finds that his Ozian clothes fit him
perfectly [298], as in ROAD and EMERALD CITY.
Now there's nothing wrong with Jam discovering that life in Oz is much
as Baum described it, and much as most of us readers would be delighted
to discover it really is. But the parallels are so close I sense that
Cosgrove was trying hard to write "a true tale of Oz," to hit all the
familiar notes without deviating too much into--gasp!--originality. She
seemed to spread her wings a bit more in WICKED WITCH, putting her most
original character unapologetically in the center of the action.
One interesting contrast between Cosgrove and Baum appears when Jam
approaches the Tin Woodman's castle. In this book that guard demands
that he "Halt and state your business" [105]. In TIN WOODMAN the man is
a "servant," albeit an armored one, and answers the questions Woot asks
in a friendly way. It sounds like the tin emperor increased security
between those books.
It's also impossible for me not to see a parallel between the trial in
Bookville and the most famous unjust trial in children's books, in ALICE
IN WONDERLAND. In Bookville only the prosecution has lawyers [154], the
jurors have prejudged the case [161], and somehow the bailiff wields the
gavel [162].
In that vein, Cosgrove offers a shadow of Baumian poking fun at
government authority in a line on page 203: "All trespassers are
punished. That is the law, and the law must be obeyed or I will be
replaced by another ruler."
The Bookville and Icetown episodes are like a few in Baum's books, but
they feel much more similar to how Thompson handles "irrelevant
episodes." In both cases, these communities hate the visitors for being
different (and for intruding), confine them, and plan to turn them into
people like themselves. In contrast to Thompson, Cosgrove spends much
more time on the pleasant, non-royal farm families Jam meets along the
way. In fact, she spends more time, period, but I'll remark on that in
another message.
J. L. Bell
JnoLBell at earthlink.net

Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 13:03:54 -0400
From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <xornom at hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: [Regalia] Various HIDDEN VALLEY comments
I haven't finished rereading HIDDEN VALLEY yet, but I remember it well
enough to make a few comments.
Ruth:
>On the negative side, Jam is a colorless character, and Percy, although
>colorful enough, seems a bit mechanical in his construction, with things
>like his "kiddo" slang over-played.
I think he's a little better developed in WICKED WITCH.
>The idea of a Leopard who Changes His
>Spots is delightful (Kipling would have been amused), but he doesn't
>actually contribute much to the action -- he and the Rhyming Dictionary are
>dropped from the party for no real reason (if they're that timid about
>encountering Terp in company with the Tin Woodman, they're likely to have
>qualms about going off on their own, too).
Yes, their departure from the party doesn't make much sense in the context
of the story. I suppose it's possible that Cosgrove thought the party was
getting too big, and chose to dispose of her own new characters, rather than
the familiar ones without whom "it would not be a true tale of Oz." I think
it would have made sense to have someone from the Emerald City show Spots
the way there. Instead, Cosgrove sends two characters who have never been
to the capital off to find it on their own.
Incidentally, I find it kind of interesting that each of the last two books
in the FF contains a character named "Spots."
Scraps seems to get along quite well with the Rhyming Dictionary, despite
her hatred for other people's rhymes in RUNAWAY. Of course, Cosgrove would
have had no way of knowing about this character trait, as it appeared in a
book that hadn't been published yet. It's still an interesting
contradiction, though.
J. L. Bell:
>When I reread HIDDEN VALLEY this month, I was struck by a line in
>Cosgrove's foreword: "Dorothy, the Scarecrow, the Tin Woodman, and many
>other old friends are in this story, for it would not be a true tale of Oz
>without them."
Of course, both Baum and Thompson wrote several books in which these
familiar characters had only minor roles, and Thompson even did a few where
they did not appear at all. Are these not "true tale[s] of Oz," by
Cosgrove's standards?
>* The party builds a raft (also in PATCHWORK GIRL) and encounters hostile
>live trees (also in SCALAWAGONS and others) [221]. Oddly enough, the Tin
>Woodman states, "I've never heard of magic wood before" [225].
>But the parallels are so close I sense that Cosgrove was trying hard to
>write "a true tale of Oz," to hit all the familiar notes without deviating
>too much into--gasp!--originality.
I believe it was you, John, who, when asked which Oz author was your least
favorite, said that it was Neill when taken "close up," because he was a
poor writer, but Snow when examined from a distance, because of how little
he added to the series. While I would agree with that basic idea, I would
actually put Cosgrove in place of Snow. While Snow's books definitely had
some derivative elements, there were still some signs of his own style. I
have to wonder if his books would have been better if he had emphasized his
own style, and not tried to imitate Baum so heavily. Not only do I have to
wonder the same thing about Cosgrove, but I think that HIDDEN VALLEY,
especially, comes across as even more derivative and formulaic than Snow's
books. I think Thompson and the McGraws did a good job at keeping Oz true
to Baum, while still letting their own ideas shine through. Neill's books
tended to be a little too much on the weird side, but he provided some
interesting new takes on life in Oz. Cosgrove, on the other hand, doesn't
add much at all to the general conception of Oz.
>The Bookville and Icetown episodes are like a few in Baum's books, but they
>feel much more similar to how Thompson handles "irrelevant episodes." In
>both cases, these communities hate the visitors for being different (and
>for intruding), confine them, and plan to turn them into people like
>themselves.
I've heard that Cosgrove had not read any of the Thompson books before
writing HIDDEN VALLEY. I believe THE OZ SCRAPBOOK, however, says that
HIDDEN VALLEY comes across as somewhat Thompsonian, probably because of the
way Cosgrove handles Bookville and Icetown. If it's true that Cosgrove had
not read the Thompson books, it's odd that she would use Thompson's model
for irrelevant episodes. I think the episodes sort of come off as weak
imitations of Thompson, in that the author knows the general way a
Thompsonian encounter would go, but she doesn't make it as entertaining as
Thompson herself would have.
One thing I found interesting in HIDDEN VALLEY is that the kites describe
the WWW as flying on a broom in order to steal them. The idea of witches
riding brooms is certainly not unknown in Oz. SCARECROW says that Blinkie's
associate witches "put their canes or broomsticks between their legs and
flew away through the air, quickly disappearing against the blue sky." (How
three witches could have both plural canes and broomsticks between them
isn't clear, unless one or more of the witches had both a cane AND a
broomstick, or a combination cane and broomstick.) Most of the witches in
LUCKY BUCKY ride on brooms, and even Mombi is described as having a
"riding broom." HIDDEN VALLEY is the first book that gives such a broom to
the WWW, however. Perhaps this was due to the influence of the MGM movie.
WICKED WITCH indicates that at least three of the Wicked Witches are related,
suggesting further MGM influence on Cosgrove/Payes.
--
I'll still be right where you left me, if you manage to forget me,
Nathan
DinnerBell at tmbg.org

Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 14:44:47 -0500
From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at umn.edu>
Subject: [Regalia] more hidden valley etc
"J. L. Bell" <jnolbell at earthlink.net> wrote:
> I kept hearing echoes of WIZARD and of LAND, which Cosgrove says (in her
afterword for the Oz Club edition) was her first and favorite of the series.
This HIDDEN VALLEY seems to resonate a lot.>
Interesting discussion of the ways that Cosgrove echoes "Wizard" (and
"Land," but the resemblances to "Wizard" seem more central). I'd sort of
noticed the resemblances in re-reading it, but hadn't thought to stop and
add up just how strong they were.
> It's also impossible for me not to see a parallel between the trial in
Bookville and the most famous unjust trial in children's books, in ALICE IN
WONDERLAND. In Bookville only the prosecution has lawyers [154], the jurors
have prejudged the case [161], and somehow the bailiff wields the gavel [162].
>
Maybe a touch of Kafka, too?
> Scraps seems to get along quite well with the Rhyming Dictionary, despite
her hatred for other people's rhymes in RUNAWAY. Of course, Cosgrove would
have had no way of knowing about this character trait, as it appeared in a
book that hadn't been published yet. It's still an interesting
contradiction, though. >
I forget -- does RPT have any comment about Scraps' reaction to Pigasus (who
doesn't rhyme himself, but causes others riding him to rhyme)?
> both Baum and Thompson wrote several books in which these familiar
characters [Dorothy, the Scarecrow, the Tin Woodman] had only minor roles,
and Thompson even did a few where they did not appear at all. Are these not
"true tale[s] of Oz," by Cosgrove's standards? >
Perhaps not exactly what she'd consider not "true," but perhaps her favorite
Oz books were those that followed the familiar pattern. RPT and Snow worked
a lot more of Baum's later characters into their first Oz books, but Neill
and the McGraws had only a few of them (slightly more than Cosgrove, but not
a lot more) in theirs.
> One thing I found interesting in HIDDEN VALLEY is that the kites describe
the WWW as flying on a broom in order to steal them. The idea of witches
riding brooms is certainly not unknown in Oz. SCARECROW says that Blinkie's
associate witches "put their canes or broomsticks between their legs and
flew away through the air, quickly disappearing against the blue sky." (How
three witches could have both plural canes and broomsticks between them
isn't clear, unless one or more of the witches had both a cane AND a
broomstick, or a combination cane and broomstick.) <
Interesting point -- but it would be difficult to phrase it more precisely
without making the phrasing very awkward-sounding!
> Most of the witches in LUCKY BUCKY ride on brooms, and even Mombi is
described as having a "riding broom." HIDDEN VALLEY is the first book that
gives such a broom to the WWW, however. Perhaps this was due to the
influence of the MGM movie. WICKED WITCH indicates that at least three of
the Wicked Witches are related, suggesting further MGM influence on
Cosgrove/Payes. <
Could be -- although there is so much Halloween iconography of wicked
witches riding brooms that it's perhaps more surprising that Baum didn't
make much use of the image than that Cosgrove did.
Ruth Berman

Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 15:42:49 EDT
From: AGannaway7 at aol.com
Subject: [Regalia] HIDDEN VALLEY notes
Ruth Berman commented, in response to J. L. Bell:
<<> It's also impossible for me not to see a parallel between the trial in
Bookville and the most famous unjust trial in children's books, in ALICE IN
WONDERLAND. In Bookville only the prosecution has lawyers [154], the jurors
have prejudged the case [161], and somehow the bailiff wields the gavel [162].
>
Maybe a touch of Kafka, too?>>
Certainly the association is possible. The English translation of THE TRIAL
appeared in 1937, although the Orson Welles film wasn't released stateside
until 1963. The Bookville incident also made me think of another kangaroo court
that padded the ending of DOROTHY AND THE WIZARD IN OZ.
Ruth also commented on how mechanical Percy's characterization seems.
Cosgrove Payes noted in her afterword for the Oz Club's edition of HIDDEN VALLEY
that an advertising man at Reilly & Lee added the '50s-isms ("Golly!" and
whatnot) to the dialogue. The author clearly disliked those embellishments, and
commented that she'd never in her life heard a child say "Golly." But as far as
the advertising lingo of the times, it seems about right.
Incidentally, Ray Powell so abhorred Percy that he rid Oz of the big white
rat in his 1960s manuscript THE RAGGEDYS IN OZ (a prequel to MR. FLINT IN OZ,
published by Buckethead in 1987).
I don't recall anyone's mentioning so far how bad Dirk Gringhuis's
illustrations are. No wonder he didn't use his last name.
And, while it's fairly common knowledge, I'll go ahead and mention the fact
that Reilly & Lee asked Cosgrove to rewrite the first chapter of HIDDEN
VALLEY. In the original version, Jam reaches Oz by rocket ship. But an earlier
manuscript submitted to the firm featured an American boy who travels to Oz in
exactly that way, and R&L didn't want to risk litigation. That other
manuscript, THE DINAMONSTER OF OZ, was published decades later by Buckethead, The
author was Kenneth Gage Baum, L. Frank's youngest son, and the illustrator was
the Royal Historian's great-granddaughter Dorothy Gita Morena. The original
version of HIDDEN VALLEY's first chapter also made its way into print decades
later, in the pages of OZ-STORY MAGAZINE.
Atticus Gannaway

Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2004 22:56:17 -0500
From: "J. L. Bell" <jnolbell at earthlink.net>
Subject: [Regalia] HIDDEN VALLEY getting into a Jam
HIDDEN VALLEY seems to pick up one of the themes I find most regrettable
about the MGM movie: the implication that being carried away to Oz is
punishment for wanting to leave home. In WIZARD Dorothy doesn't want to
leave; she's just unlucky enough to be carried away. (She could have
avoided the trip if she hadn't been so anxious to get Toto into the
storm cellar, but she's not the sort of person to leave a friend in
danger, and Baum doesn't dwell on that choice.)
A similar theme appears in the original opening for HIDDEN VALLEY, which
was in the sixth and last issue of OZ-STORY. In that chapter, Jam's
father and his assistant are building a rocket ship in the backyard. (It
takes five paragraphs for Jam to show up; the revised opening seems
stronger because it puts the child-hero first.) Jam sneaks aboard the
rocket at night to see what it's like and accidentally blasts off. Soon
after that Cosgrove has him crying and thinking that "he would never,
never be naughty again."
In the published book Jam doesn't think that his journey to Oz is a
result of doing what he knew he shouldn't. But he does take his kite and
crate up to the top of a hill to see if the wind could lift them. Even
if he's just playing, Jam does imagine going on an "expedition" [20] and
being taken "to some strange land" [21]. That makes him (almost) unique
among Americans who arrive in Oz for the first time: he's not the victim
of a natural disaster or unexpected magic. Part of Jam actually *wants*
to leave Evansville, Ohio. Then he actually does, and psychologically he
has to face the consequences.
Another striking aspect of Cosgrove's original opening is that word
"naughty." Baum *never* calls Dorothy "naughty." He usually reserves
that word for Nomes and other antagonists. In LOST PRINCESS, Dorothy
chides Button-Bright for being naughty, and in LAND Mombi calls Tip
that. But as author Baum doesn't scold Dorothy, or Betsy, or Trot. His
protagonists understand when they get into a fix, and they look ahead.
While Cosgrove dropped the "naughty" for her final manuscript, Jam is
still unusually regretful about having come to Oz. Early in his journey
he says, "I just want to go back to Ohio and never, never leave again"
[67]. We rarely see that sentiment in the Oz books, but it sure echoes
the last scene of the MGM movie. (Like Nathan DeHoff, I'd noted the
Wicked Witch of the West's "magic broomstick" [95] as another likely
result of the movie.)
Later, in Icetown, Cosgrove tells us that Jam was "very frightened...he
would never see his home again," and "wished sincerely that he had never
been carried away" [203]. Baum's young protagonists (up to TIK-TOK) also
wanted to get home, but I don't recall them spending much time on
regrets. At the end of the book, despite having the rare privilege of
revisiting Oz whenever he wants, Jam tells his parents, "I'd rather be
here at home with you than in any fairyland" [313].
In fact, Jam seems more concerned about his parents than they do about
him. His mother doesn't pay much attention to him [18], his father even
less [21]. Yet he worries about his parents worrying about him [85]. He
rejects the idea of moving to Oz because "I don't think my parents would
want to be here" [113]. Ozma apparently senses his anxiety enough to
make his parents know "that you will be home soon" [299]--again,
something that never occurs in the Oz books, though Aquareine puts
Trot's mother to sleep in SEA FAIRIES.
Overall, Cosgrove seems to show a little less respect for Jam as a
person than Baum and Thompson did for most of their young protagonists.
She writes of his "shrill little voice" [17] and "little legs" [65].
Baum wrote often of Dorothy and other heroines as "little girls," but
they're always so capable that term seems like a simple physical
description. Cosgrove's phrases seem more condescending.
She also gives Jam seemingly immature emotional responses, especially
when compared to Baum's heroines. He's "close to tears" at hearing the
lab rodents talk [29], and again when captured by Terp [48]. Seeing the
giant again means "Jam trembled with fear" [257]. (I'd thought Jam's
question to the Wizard about being sent home by magic--"Will it hurt
any?" [287]--was another example of Cosgrove infantilizing him. But that
turns out to be another echo of Baum. Zeb asks almost exactly the same
question toward the end of DOROTHY & WIZARD.)
Of course, other Oz heroes also show fear, despondency, and similar
emotions, but we usually get to see them act bravely as well. (Or, in
the case of Zeb, Button-Bright, and Ojo, they're paired with the less
flappable Dorothy.) Once Jam meets the Tin Woodman, however, he stops
doing much of the problem-solving on his journey. Percy, the Scarecrow,
or other characters figure out how to get across most of the obstacles
he meets. In the final confrontation with Terp, Jam's role is nothing
more than imaginary bait. After a promising early start, he seems to be
mostly along for the ride.
Jam does bring one important resource: the useful stuff in his seemingly
waterproof knapsack [90] and the pockets of his jeans. Just when they're
needed, he pulls out a jackknife that's actually sharp enough to cut a
thick vine [56], a pencil stub [94], and matches [212]. (Oddly enough,
the party just assumes that one of them has matches in Icetown. They
unstuff the Scarecrow and prepare to burn his straw before determining
how they could actually light it. They also don't try chopping through
the igloo with, say, the Tin Woodman's axe.)
J. L. Bell
JnoLBell at earthlink.net

Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2004 09:18:23 -0700 (PDT)
From: Alan Wise <alanmacwise at yahoo.com>
Subject: [Regalia] HIDDEN VALLEY Dorothy
--- "J. L. Bell" <jnolbell at earthlink.net> wrote:
> Overall, Cosgrove seems to show a little less
> respect for Jam as a
> person than Baum and Thompson did for most of their
> young protagonists.
> She writes of his "shrill little voice" [17] and
> "little legs" [65].
> Baum wrote often of Dorothy and other heroines as
> "little girls," but
> they're always so capable that term seems like a
> simple physical
> description. Cosgrove's phrases seem more
> condescending.
Cosgrove's Dorothy, to me at least, seems a bit older
than the Dorothy I usually imagine, more of a big
sister to Jam than a companion. Of course, as John
Bell pointed out, she has had to take care of Button
Bright, Ojo, and Zeb during previous adventures, but
that has always seemed a part of her strength as a
character. Being motherly is a stength of another
sort, but not one I readily accept in Dorothy. Baum's
Dorothy is often more martial than maternal, but in
HIDDEN VALLEY, she doesn't do much. She spends much
of her time comforting Jam, never really taking the
lead in anything the party does. She offers
optimistic palliatives when they face danger, but
never attempts to face the danger herself.
Alan Wise

Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2004 18:00:44 -0400
From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <xornom at hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: [Regalia] more hidden valley etc
Ruth:
> > Scraps seems to get along quite well with the Rhyming Dictionary,
>despite
>her hatred for other people's rhymes in RUNAWAY. Of course, Cosgrove would
>have had no way of knowing about this character trait, as it appeared in a
>book that hadn't been published yet. It's still an interesting
>contradiction, though. >
>
>I forget -- does RPT have any comment about Scraps' reaction to Pigasus
>(who
>doesn't rhyme himself, but causes others riding him to rhyme)?
I don't have PIRATES handy to check just now, but I seem to recall Pigasus
being surprised that Scraps could rhyme without riding him. I don't think
there was much of a reaction in the other direction.
If someone does have the Thompson books at hand, they might also want to
check Scraps's reaction to Snif in JACK PUMPKINHEAD. (If no one else does
it, I'll probably check when I get the chance.)
> > Most of the witches in LUCKY BUCKY ride on brooms, and even Mombi is
>described as having a "riding broom." HIDDEN VALLEY is the first book that
>gives such a broom to the WWW, however. Perhaps this was due to the
>influence of the MGM movie. WICKED WITCH indicates that at least three of
>the Wicked Witches are related, suggesting further MGM influence on
>Cosgrove/Payes. <
>
>Could be -- although there is so much Halloween iconography of wicked
>witches riding brooms that it's perhaps more surprising that Baum didn't
>make much use of the image than that Cosgrove did.
I think I've seen it suggested that Baum decided to have the WWW carry an
umbrella instead of a broom, as a symbol of her fear of water. If we
combine the references from WIZARD and HIDDEN VALLEY, though, she presumably
had both an umbrella AND a broom.
--
I'll still be right where you left me, if you manage to forget me,
Nathan
DinnerBell at tmbg.org

Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2004 15:52:43 -0500
From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at umn.edu>
Subject: [Regalia] hidden valley concerns
AGannaway7 at aol.com wrote:
> I don't recall anyone's mentioning so far how bad Dirk Gringhuis's
> illustrations are. No wonder he didn't use his last name. >
How do you feel they compare to Frank Kramer's? I think Dirk's are slightly
more attractive. Neither one seems to have the grace or humor of Denslow and
Neill, though.
> And, while it's fairly common knowledge, I'll go ahead and mention the
> fact that Reilly & Lee asked Cosgrove to rewrite the first chapter of
> HIDDEN VALLEY. In the original version, Jam reaches Oz by rocket ship. But
> an earlier manuscript submitted to the firm featured an American boy who
> travels to Oz in exactly that way, and R&L didn't want to risk litigation.
> That other manuscript, THE DINAMONSTER OF OZ, was published decades later
> by Buckethead, The author was Kenneth Gage Baum, L. Frank's youngest son,
> and the illustrator was the Royal Historian's great-granddaughter Dorothy
> Gita Morena. The original version of HIDDEN VALLEY's first chapter also
> made its way into print decades later, in the pages of OZ-STORY MAGAZINE.
> >
Thanks for the background reminder. Although it doesn't seem to have been
enough of a concern for R&L to show up in their records, they may also have
been concerned that the rocketship arrival would be too similar to Speedy's
arrival in RPT's "Yellow Knight."
"J. L. Bell" <jnolbell at earthlink.net> wrote:
> HIDDEN VALLEY seems to pick up one of the themes I find most regrettable
> about the MGM movie: the implication that being carried away to Oz is
> punishment for wanting to leave home. In WIZARD Dorothy doesn't want to
> leave; she's just unlucky enough to be carried away. (She could have
> avoided the trip if she hadn't been so anxious to get Toto into the storm
> cellar, but she's not the sort of person to leave a friend in danger, and
> Baum doesn't dwell on that choice.) >
Jam seems overly timid -- I'm not sure if that's a problem because if it's
implausible that he'd be all *that* worried about his parents' worry (he
knows that he's all right himself and making his way back as quickly as he
can -- and he gets away from the various dangers he meets with enough ease
to suggest that he shouldn't be quite *that* worried about his own safety),
or if it's just that it sems like a distraction from the reader's enjoyment
of the adventure if the protagonist seems to think the adventures are that
frightening?
> In fact, Jam seems more concerned about his parents than they do about
> him. His mother doesn't pay much attention to him [18], his father even
> less [21]. Yet he worries about his parents worrying about him [85]. He
> rejects the idea of moving to Oz because "I don't think my parents would
> want to be here" [113]. Ozma apparently senses his anxiety enough to make
> his parents know "that you will be home soon" [299]--again, something that
> never occurs in the Oz books, though Aquareine puts Trot's mother to sleep
> in SEA FAIRIES. >
Other visitors to Oz, of course, were sometimes without families to worry
about them, and in some cases the disposals of the family's worries in
earlier books are implausible to some extent (Trot's mother gets spared
worries in "Sea Fairies," but not in "Sky Island," and we never find out
what she thought of losing her daughter entirely; while Speedy's uncle
claims to have felt sure that the boy was all right and would turn up). But
although Jam's concern is plausible, it's maybe over-emphasized.
> Oddly enough, the party just assumes that one of them has matches in
> Icetown. They unstuff the Scarecrow and prepare to burn his straw before
> determining how they could actually light it. They also don't try chopping
> through the igloo with, say, the Tin Woodman's axe.) >
Well, they could always re-stuff him if they found they hadn't any matches.
The part that bothered me in that scene was that I'd think it would take a
fire of some considerable duration -- an hour or more? -- to melt through
ice thick enough to make an igloo, and I don't think one Scarecrow's worth
of straw would burn that long.
Alan Wise <alanmacwise at yahoo.com> wrote:
> [Dorothy] spends much of her time comforting Jam, never really taking the
> lead in anything the party does. She offers optimistic palliatives when
> they face danger, but never attempts to face the danger herself.
>
I wonder if it would have been more effective to have omitted Dorothy and
let Jam make his journey with the Tin Woodman and Scarecrow only as
guidesand comforters. Might have given the TW more of a chance to show off
his loving heart? It's his sturdy axe that gets called into a lot more use
(even if not inside the igloo) in the story as it.
Ruth Berman

Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2004 17:02:55 -0400
From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <xornom at hotmail.com>
Subject: [Regalia] Early HIDDEN VALLEY comments
I've finished rereading the first five chapters of HIDDEN VALLEY, and I
might as well make a few comments on this part of the book.
Cosgrove puts the Winkie Country in the west again, which is good, but
consistently misspells "Gillikin" in the same way Thompson did. Since
Cosgrove apparently hadn't read any Thompson books before writing HIDDEN
VALLEY, I have to wonder if this was a case of an editor "correcting"
Cosgrove's spelling.
On p. 36, Jam tells the Gillikins his full name and exact address, based on
"his mother's admonition about what to do if he ever was lost." I find it
kind of surprising that Mrs. Manley would want her son telling this
information to strangers. For what it's worth, there really is an
Evansville in Ohio. It's slightly southeast of Cleveland, near the
Pennsylvania border.
I found the idea of Terp's guardian monster having two heads, one awake
during the day and the other at night, was a clever touch. Are there any
mythological beings that might have given Cosgrove the idea?
--
I'll still be right where you left me, if you manage to forget me,
Nathan
DinnerBell at tmbg.org

Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2004 16:52:42 -0600
From: Ivan Van Laningham <ivanlan at pauahtun.org>
Subject: Re: [Regalia] Early HIDDEN VALLEY comments
Hi All--
Nathan Mulac DeHoff wrote:
>
> On p. 36, Jam tells the Gillikins his full name and exact address, based on
> "his mother's admonition about what to do if he ever was lost." I find it
> kind of surprising that Mrs. Manley would want her son telling this
> information to strangers.
When the book was written, mothers indeed told children to memorize
their addresses and phone numbers so that kindly strangers and helpful
policemen could easily bring them home.
Metta,
Ivan
----------------------------------------------
Ivan Van Laningham
God N Locomotive Works

Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2004 15:54:01 -0700 (PDT)
From: Alan Wise <alanmacwise at yahoo.com>
Subject: [Regalia] HIDDEN VALLEY addresses
--- Nathan Mulac DeHoff <xornom at hotmail.com> wrote:
> On p. 36, Jam tells the Gillikins his full name and
> exact address, based on
> "his mother's admonition about what to do if he ever
> was lost." I find it
> kind of surprising that Mrs. Manley would want her
> son telling this
> information to strangers.
Wasn't this common practice in mid-twentieth century
America? It seems to me that I remember any number of
references to children having their addresses pinned
to their coats when on a journey alone, so if they
became lost a friendly stranger could help them along.
And from my own experience, starting elementary
school in the late 70s, there was a strong push to
have all Kindergarteners know their phone number and
address in case of emergency. All this, of course,
comes from a time when children wandered the
neighborhood with impunity and before discovering the
lure of Atari.
Alan Wise

Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2004 13:39:08 -0500
From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at umn.edu>
Subject: [Regalia] hidden spelling, addressing, guarding
"Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <xornom at hotmail.com> wrote:
> Cosgrove puts the Winkie Country in the west again, which is good, but
> consistently misspells "Gillikin" in the same way Thompson did. Since
> Cosgrove apparently hadn't read any Thompson books before writing HIDDEN
> VALLEY, I have to wonder if this was a case of an editor "correcting"
> Cosgrove's spelling. >
Could be, But the example of "Munchkin" and the general suffix -kin must be
a pretty good incentive to anyone to mistake the spelling that way.
> On p. 36, Jam tells the Gillikins his full name and exact address, based
> on "his mother's admonition about what to do if he ever was lost." I find
> it kind of surprising that Mrs. Manley would want her son telling this
> information to strangers. <
As Ivan Laningham and Alan Wise commented -- yes, it was standard practice.
But, come to think of it, that leaves me puzzled -- what do parents nowadays
tell their children to do if they get lost? At some point, if the kid wants
help finding the way home, the kid has to admit where home is, after all. Or
is the idea to have them let out only the phone number and hope that any
kindly stranger passing by has a cellphone handy? (If the idea is never to
let the kid out alone, and assume that a kid allowed out only under escort
will never get lost -- the idea doesn't sound entirely reliable.)
> I found the idea of Terp's guardian monster having two heads, one awake
> during the day and the other at night, was a clever touch. Are there any
> mythological beings that might have given Cosgrove the idea?
>
I can't think of other examples of guardian critters with different heads so
as to take different watches. Probably the best known guardian critter for
trees was the dragon, as with the dragon guarding the tree with the Golden
Fleece and the dragon guarding the apples of the Hesperides in Greek
mythology. I think those are both pictured as one-headed. Cerberus the dog
guarding the entrance to Hades has three heads, but all dog-heads. The
chimaera has different heads, but is a solitary danger, not in charge of
guarding anything (and the different heads don't differ by when awake).
Argus was a guardian who was awake all the time because he was argus-eyed,
and at least some of his many eyes were awake at any time of the day (until
lulled to sleep by Hermes' lyre). Cosgrove could have been combining
elements from all of these, maybe. There are also plenty of fairytales with
multiple-headed monsters for heroes to fight -- usually dragons or giants
--
but, again, the heads are of the same sort.
Ruth Berman

Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2004 17:45:55 -0500
From: "J. L. Bell" <jnolbell at earthlink.net>
Subject: [Regalia] Re: Scraps and other poets
As I recall, Scraps's response to Pigasus was to work hard to keep up
with the people spouting verse from his back, but she wasn't angry about
his arrival.
Neill portrayed Scraps as much more scrappy than either of his
predecessors: remember how she kept trying to box people in WONDER CITY?
So her feeling upset at another poet in RUNAWAY seems to reflect that
characterization. But what I recall most clearly from that
Neill/Shanower book was her sitting down to work harder on her verse,
knowing she had competition.
Perhaps she's more friendly to the Rhyming Dictionary because the book
offers not only his own verse but also rhyming advice for other poets.
J. L. Bell
JnoLBell at earthlink.net

Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2004 17:08:10 -0400
From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <xornom at hotmail.com>
Subject: [Regalia] HIDDEN VALLEY irrelevant episodes
Just a few brief notes on the small communities encountered by the
adventurers in HIDDEN VALLEY:
The Equinots are obviously meant to resemble the centaurs of Greek
mythology, but they are never referred to as centaurs, just "Equinots."
While the name is obviously derived from "equine," it also brings the
word "equinox" to mind. The fact that the Equinots carry lassos seems to be
continuing the cowboy theme introduced with Jam's outfit.
The Kite Island episode suggests that all kites in Oz are sentient (or at
least they become so when supplied with faces), and that they can fly
without wind.
In GNOME KING, Peter and Scraps met a Bookman, with a book for a body. The
people of Bookville have books for heads instead. Similar idea, but
different in execution. That's not to mention that the Bookman is friendly,
and the people of Bookville rude.
Nathan

Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2004 09:24:48 -0500
From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at umn.edu>
Subject: [Regalia] hidden valley ozma, also a reprint note
One of the oddities in the artwork for "Hidden Valley" is that the one illo
of Ozma portrays her as an adult. I wonder if Dirk had seen the 30's reprint
of "Ozma" with a cover illo of an adult Ozma -- although;, come to think of
it, Kramer's Ozma for Snow's two Oz books also shows her as an adult. In all
three books, Ozma has a lot of magic at her command -- so much that (like
Glinda) she becomes a character it would be difficult to put into a lead
role in the stories, as she can get problems solved too easily. The Mimics'
powers are set up to be difficult even for Ozma and Glinda to combat, once
they get back from Burzee, and they need Ozana's help, but, even so, Ozma's
re-appearance in the story is the signal that the problems and the story are
about to end. I'm guessing that this powerfulness is what made the artists
decide to draw Ozma as an adult (Dirk's Ozma, if anything, looks even a
trifle older than Kramer's). In the McGraws' "Merry-go-Round," Ozma is still
basically an end-of-the-story-appearance, and I don't remember offhand if
they put similar stress on her maternal power, or how Dick Martin drew her
there, but both the McGraws and Dick knew (and were interested in) the full
set of Oz books better than Cosgrove and Snow were, so I'm guessing that
Dick wouldn't have drawn Ozma as being quite so old. And, of course, when
the McGraws wrote "Forbidden Fountain," they did want to use Ozma as a main
character, and besides making it possible for her to get into trouble by
arranging for a magical case of amnesia, they needed to have her young
enough to be disguised as a boy. Accordingly, Dick's illos for "FF" have her
somewhere in the teen-range, and more in line with Baum's, RPT's, and
Neill's portrayals of the character.
Ruth Berman

Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2004 13:34:09 -0500
From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at umn.edu>
Subject: [Regalia] hidden valley communities, oz kids
"Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <xornom at hotmail.com> wrote:
> The Equinots are obviously meant to resemble the centaurs of Greek
> mythology, but they are never referred to as centaurs, just "Equinots."
> While the name is obviously derived from "equine," it also brings the word
> "equinox" to mind. The fact that the Equinots carry lassos seems to be
> continuing the cowboy theme introduced with Jam's outfit. >
Cosgrove might perhaps have been punning on the prefix to suggest that they
are Equally horse and human. She might also have had somewhere in mind a
recollection of the suffix -naut, as in Argonaut, and might have an
interpreted "-naut" to mean "type-of-person" (although actually, a naute' is
a sailor, and the combination means sailor-from-the-named-ship, or
named-program in the case of astronauts).
> The Kite Island episode suggests that all kites in Oz are sentient (or at
> least they become so when supplied with faces), and that they can fly
> without wind. >
Reminded me a little bit of the sentient balloons in Baum's Loonville or
RPT's Balloon Island.
> In GNOME KING, Peter and Scraps met a Bookman, with a book for a body.
> The people of Bookville have books for heads instead. Similar idea, but
> different in execution. That's not to mention that the Bookman is
> friendly, and the people of Bookville rude. >
Seems kind of a pity, doesn't it, to use books as hostiles!
Ruth Berman

Date: Thu, 09 Sep 2004 16:43:24 -0400
From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <xornom at hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: [Regalia] hidden valley communities
Ruth:
>>In GNOME KING, Peter and Scraps met a Bookman, with a book for a body. The
>>people of Bookville have books for heads instead. Similar idea, but
>>different in execution. That's not to mention that the Bookman is
>>friendly, and the people of Bookville rude. >
>
>Seems kind of a pity, doesn't it, to use books as hostiles!
Definitely, although Thompson didn't seem to have the most positive attitude
toward books and reading either. Recall King Fumbo's reading habit
bankrupting Ragbad, or the somewhat mocking attitude toward Gureeda's
reading in SPEEDY.
It does seem like Cosgrove had the idea that minor Ozian communities were
pretty much required to be hostile. I suppose you could count Kite Island
(although that wasn't the true home for the kites) and WICKED WITCH's Rubber
Band as exceptions to this rule, though.
--
I'll still be right where you left me, if you manage to forget me,
Nathan
DinnerBell at tmbg.org

Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 14:25:47 +0000
From: "J. L. Bell" <jnolbell at earthlink.net>
Subject: [Regalia] HIDDEN VALLEY episode details
Nathan DeHoff wrote:
<<For what it's worth, there really is an Evansville in Ohio. It's
slightly southeast of Cleveland, near the Pennsylvania border.>>
Evansville, Ohio, doesn't seem to be an incorporated town or city, but
rather an area in Trumbull County. That county is rural enough to
contain the state's only covered bridge and an Amish community. Which
brings up the questions of why the Manley family was living there, and
where did Prof. Manley teach? Youngstown State University?
There doesn't seem to be a "Terrace Place" in Evansville for Jam to live
on. For Oz connections, however, Mapquest shows there's a "Roselawn Drive."
<
awake during the day and the other at night, was a clever touch. Are
there any mythological beings that might have given Cosgrove the idea?>>
There's Janus, with one head but two faces, so that he sees all. The
multi-headed guardian reminded me of Cerberus, and there are a number of
other monsters with multiple heads or made up of parts of different
animals (as Ruth Berman and others mentioned). But different animal
heads that take turns sleeping seems new.
<<The fact that the Equinots carry lassos seems to be continuing the
cowboy theme introduced with Jam's outfit.>>
Cosgrove also repeatedly describes the Equinots galloping over the
"purple sage" [e.g., 218], which is appropriate for Gillikin (or even
Gilliken) territory, but also alludes to Zane Gray.
That motif seems to reflect the pervasiveness of Westerns in American
popular culture at this time. Before rereading, I recalled Jam's cowboy
hat as an even bigger part of his identity, but he loses it rather early
in his adventure [89].
<<The Kite Island episode suggests that all kites in Oz are sentient (or
at least they become so when supplied with faces), and that they can fly
without wind.>>
Yes, it seemed very significant that the only thing holding Jam's kite
back from talking is that it doesn't have a face with a mouth. That
could hold implications for many other objects in Oz. Notably, Dirk
draws the magic trees with faces [219] even though Cosgrove says nothing
about this detail; then again, Denslow did the same with the Fighting Trees.
Another interesting detail tied to this episode is that Ozma sends Jam
home with his Collapsible Kite and restored crate [309]. But we don't
see a face on that kite, or hear from it. Is Ozma depriving a character
of its freedom and sentience by sending it back to America? Or has she
created a replica of the original in its place? The kites on the island
refer to the children who flew them as "masters," a word used by
slaveowners but also by pet-owners [95], so the Collapsible Kite might
feel some loyalty to Jam.
Cosgrove's editor suggested sending Jam to Oz via kite, according to her
afterword in the Oz Club edition, but that idea was inspired by some
earlier version of the episode of the kites on the island. Quite
possibly Cosgrove didn't think through the implications of sending Jam
back the same way.
Atticus Gannaway wrote:
<<The Bookville incident also made me think of another kangaroo court
that padded the ending of DOROTHY AND THE WIZARD IN OZ.>>
Eureka's trial doesn't strike me as leaping to the level of a "kangaroo
court" since everyone in the Emerald City, Ozma most of all, seems eager
to be fair and just. They just aren't very practiced at it, producing a
lot of ridiculousness. The Queen of Hearts, the Bookvillains, and the
authorities in Kafka seem to hop to a guilty verdict much more quickly.
Ruth Berman wrote:
<<The part that bothered me in that [escape from Icetown] was that I'd
think it would take a fire of some considerable duration -- an hour or
more? -- to melt through ice thick enough to make an igloo, and I don't
think one Scarecrow's worth of straw would burn that long.>>
Yes, that bothered me, too. Another oddity is that the North Wind knows
of their escape plan, takes pleasure in trying to thwart it, yet doesn't
warn the snowmen [214].
<<In all three books, Ozma has a lot of magic at her command -- so much
that (like Glinda) she becomes a character it would be difficult to put
into a lead role in the stories, as she can get problems solved too
easily.>>
Yes, and it seems significant that in HIDDEN VALLEY Ozma is once again
away from the Emerald City, visiting Glinda, and therefore not
immediately available [118, 120].
Toward the end of TIK-TOK, Baum gave Ozma and the Shaggy Man magical
cell phones, but may have regretted that afterward. He never mentioned
them again, nor did any other Reilly & Lee author. That sort of easy,
instantaneous communication would have wreaked havoc on traditional Oz
plots, even more than the Magic Belt and Great Book of Records.
And, coming 'round again, Nathan DeHoff wrote:
<<Cosgrove apparently hadn't read any Thompson books before writing
HIDDEN VALLEY>>
Yet she has Jam sent home at the end Wizard's "famous wishing pills"
[302]. The Wizard didn't develop his own pills (apparently from Dr.
Nikidik's) until after LOST KING.
That detail hints that Cosgrove may have read a bit of Thompson's work,
which makes sense for someone growing up as an Oz fan in the 1920s and
'30s. She may not have liked or recalled those books much, or even
recognized they were by a different author. With Thompson still around
in 1951 and making at least one comment to Reilly & Lee about not
wanting other writers to use her characters, it may have made sense for
the publisher and Cosgrove to distance themselves from any influence at
all from her.
HIDDEN VALLEY says the Wizard swallows a "large white pill," different
from the silver pills in LAND (Cosgrove's favorite Oz book). I've always
assumed Thompson wrote of the Wizard's wishing pills as silver also, but
I see that in WISHING HORSE and HANDY MANDY she doesn't describe them at
all.
J. L. Bell
JnoLBell at earthlink.net

Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 22:15:23 +0000
From: "J. L. Bell" <jnolbell at earthlink.net>
Subject: [Regalia] HIDDEN VALLEY hero
Nathan DeHoff wrote:
< least favorite, said that it was Neill when taken "close up," because he
was a poor writer, but Snow when examined from a distance, because of
how little he added to the series. While I would agree with that basic
idea, I would actually put Cosgrove in place of Snow. While Snow's
books definitely had some derivative elements, there were still some
signs of his own style. . . . Cosgrove, on the other hand, doesn't add
much at all to the general conception of Oz.>>
You've got a better memory than I. I had to look up what I wrote to
Gehan Cooray back in 1999:
+++++++++
Least Fav. Oz Author and why? - At a distance, Snow; he didn't bring
much new to Oz, and reading his books instilled few fond memories. Close
up, Neill; his books treat Oz in new ways that I find refreshing and
inspiring, but his actual storytelling can give me a headache.
++++++++
I agree that with one major exception HIDDEN VALLEY adds little to Oz.
Cosgrove seems to try too hard to recreate a Baum plot, and her hostile
communities echo most of Thompson's. In WICKED WITCH she adds a bit
more--I think Trot's sudden transformation is particularly significant
because Cosgrove's predecessors had never portrayed such a thing
happening to a little girl in the Emerald City. (Kidnapping,
yes--transformation into food, no.)
But another ingredient of my opinion involved whether an author's books
provide "fond memories." I find few of Snow's creations to be pleasant.
In fact, he seems best at unpleasant creations, like the Mimics or the
horrible theater. Those elements are truly joyless, and unfortunately so
are a lot of the things he seems to want to be delightful.
As one contrast, consider the Story Blossom Garden in MAGICAL MIMICS
versus Bookville in HIDDEN VALLEY. Both take characters into little
worlds based on literature: in one case, flowers tell familiar genres of
stories, and in the other the books act for themselves. Bookville isn't
a nice place, or a truly comic one; most of its characters are one-note,
and the episode offers no interesting new look at our relations to books.
But compared to the Story Blossom Garden, the Bookville episode's a
gripping summer read! It actually offers a plot, not just a series of
puns. It doesn't simply distract two of the series' most dynamic
characters from acting when they know the Emerald City is in grave
danger. It's not straining so hard to be delightful.
I may also be seeing Snow as less original because of how much he took
from SHAGGY MAN. When I was growing up, JOHN DOUGH was in print (from
Dover) and SHAGGY MAN wasn't (Books of Wonder hadn't reprinted it yet).
Therefore, Snow's borrowing of the Valley of Romance and the Fairy
Beaver King tinted my first reading of his book.
So what's the exceptional new addition to Oz I perceive in HIDDEN
VALLEY? Percy, of course! Percy the personality kid!
The Oz books have shown us other small animals enlarged to human size,
of course. But the two most famous examples--Prof. Wogglebug and the
Frogman--are much more like each other when they start out than they're
like Percy. They're both vain about their intelligence, and they both
dress in flashy parvenu fashion as they adopt human habits.
Percy, in contrast, remains a white rat--just one who happens to be "ten
times his original size" [74]. Even when he dresses up for the palace
banquet, he puts on animal garments: a collar and bow on his tail [298].
(Eric Shanower gives Percy a bow tie in WICKED WITCH, as I recall.) And
Percy doesn't boast about his brainpower, even though he'd be one of the
first to point out the number of times he saves the party.
Indeed, Percy rather quickly makes himself the real new hero of HIDDEN
VALLEY. I can't tell if Cosgrove planned that, or whether her rat ran
away with the book as she wrote. At first he and Pinny and Gig are
rather similar. But starting on page 49, with Jam locked up in Terp's
castle and on the morning menu, Percy takes center stage. He tells Jam
what to do [57]. He becomes the book's chief problem-solver until the
Scarecrow appears.
Cosgrove even shifts into Percy's point of view in chapter 6 to show him
stealing the muffin (though that chapter ends in the point of view of
Terp, of all people). We also see Percy's point of view starting on page
175, just after he's worked with the Scarecrow to come up with a plan to
escape from Bookville. Meanwhile, Jam becomes less of a decision-maker,
more of an observer. (And, as Alan Wise shrewdly noted, traditional Oz
heroine Dorothy comes across as a combination of baby-sitter and tour
guide.)
I should give credit to Pinny and Gig for making the crucial and timely
suggestion that Percy eat the muffin [71]. They soon vanish from the
plot, but without them Jam might still be currycombing the Equinots.
Not that Percy's perfect, of course. He's deeply frightened by the
prospect of returning to natural size. This provides a nice dramatic
scene when he temporarily starts shrinking [111]. It starts a clock
ticking toward the end of the book [234], as well as fitting the
traditional "go to the Emerald City to ask the authorities for
something" theme of "a true tale of Oz."
Percy's also more scared of heights than Jam [101]. His pride is hurt
when folks think he can't climb the bookshelves [142]. And he has that
habit of calling everyone "kiddo," starting even with his first speeches
on page 29, which some people--lots of people, apparently--find
annoying. But even that strikes me as consistent with his overall speech
pattern. Percy also speaks of Oz's beloved ruler as "this Ozma person"
[116] and says the Wizard's magic has made everything "hunky dory"
[309]. He dubs himself the "personality kid" [106]. He makes puns [53]
and other jokes [289]. I imagine him talking like Leo Gorcey of the
Bowery Boys, but a little squeakier.
In sum, I think Cosgrove creates a fairly rounded character who has
above-average potential for more stories. In his combination of ego and
capabilities Percy reminds me of the Ork more than any other animal.
Both of them, and many of the other interesting secondary characters in
Oz, are exasperating at times.
I'm not saying Cosgrove pulls off a completely successful
characterization; HIDDEN VALLEY was, after all, her first book, perhaps
her first complete manuscript. But I was neither surprised nor
displeased to see Percy get his own book.
Atticus Gannaway wrote:
<<Ray Powell so abhorred Percy that he rid Oz of the big white rat in
his 1960s manuscript THE RAGGEDYS IN OZ>>
Much as I liked Ray Powell when I met him years ago, I think that any
character who can produce such strong feelings in a Raggedy Ann and Andy
fan is somewhat successful.
I doubt anyone's felt a desire to write a book that kills off Hank or
Grumpy or the Doubtful Dromedary or other animals who end up in the
Emerald City at the end of their first books. Why? Because those flatter
personalities are squeezed dry, and their creator shunts them into minor
roles, if any.
But once an Oz fan reads HIDDEN VALLEY, it's hard to imagine Percy
receding into the background in the Emerald City. If you don't like him,
the only solution is to exterminate him.
<<Cosgrove Payes noted in her afterword for the Oz Club's edition of
HIDDEN VALLEY that an advertising man at Reilly & Lee added the
'50s-isms ("Golly!" and whatnot) to the dialogue. The author clearly
disliked those embellishments, and commented that she'd never in her
life heard a child say "Golly.">>
Cosgrove credits Reilly & Lee head Frank O'Donnell himself with revising
her first chapter (or at least with sending the revision to her). That's
the chapter in which Jam says, "Golly!" I think other phrases reveal
that HIDDEN VALLEY dates from post-WW2 America, but none sounds quite so
manufactured.
The following month, Cosgrove writes, she learned the firm "had asked
Robert Peck, an advertising executive..., to go over the poetry." The
verse stays nicely metrical until Scraps's verse on page 294--nearly the
very end of the book. And then it gets back on track for the Rhyming
Dictionary's long speech. Oddly, considering this special attention to
the verse "in house," there's a typo on page 179 ("be" for "he").
J. L. Bell
JnoLBell at earthlink.net

Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2004 14:54:20 -0400
From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <xornom at hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: [Regalia] HIDDEN VALLEY North Wind and Thompson influence
J. L. Bell:
>Ruth Berman wrote:
><<The part that bothered me in that [escape from Icetown] was that I'd
>think it would take a fire of some considerable duration -- an hour or
>more? -- to melt through ice thick enough to make an igloo, and I don't
>think one Scarecrow's worth of straw would burn that long.>>
>
>Yes, that bothered me, too. Another oddity is that the North Wind knows of
>their escape plan, takes pleasure in trying to thwart it, yet doesn't warn
>the snowmen [214].
It's possible that the Wind resents being a slave, and doesn't go beyond
exactly what it's told to do. Maybe the Wind just likes to annoy people,
and so takes pleasure both in trying to thwart the efforts of Jam and his
friends AND those of the snowmen.
>And, coming 'round again, Nathan DeHoff wrote:
><<Cosgrove apparently hadn't read any Thompson books before writing HIDDEN
>VALLEY>>
>
>Yet she has Jam sent home at the end Wizard's "famous wishing pills" [302].
>The Wizard didn't develop his own pills (apparently from Dr. Nikidik's)
>until after LOST KING.
>
>That detail hints that Cosgrove may have read a bit of Thompson's work,
>which makes sense for someone growing up as an Oz fan in the 1920s and
>'30s. She may not have liked or recalled those books much, or even
>recognized they were by a different author.
That's definitely possible. I think it might have been Eric Shanower who
said that Cosgrove hadn't read any Thompson books by the time she tried
writing her own Oz book, but it's possible that her memory was faulty when
she said this.
It's also possible that an editor came up with the idea of the Wizard using
Wishing Pills to return Jam home, though.
>I agree that with one major exception HIDDEN VALLEY adds little to Oz.
>Cosgrove seems to try too hard to recreate a Baum plot, and her hostile
>communities echo most of Thompson's. In WICKED WITCH she adds a bit more--I
>think Trot's sudden transformation is particularly significant because
>Cosgrove's predecessors had never portrayed such a thing happening to a
>little girl in the Emerald City. (Kidnapping, yes--transformation into
>food, no.)
WICKED WITCH also introduces a character who was hinted at way back in
DOTWIZ, and completes the symmetry of Wicked Witches of the Compass Points.
--
I'll still be right where you left me, if you manage to forget me,
Nathan
DinnerBell at tmbg.org

Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2004 18:54:34 +0000
From: "J. L. Bell" <jnolbell at earthlink.net>
Subject: [Regalia] HIDDEN VALLEY communities
Phil wrote:
<<You might feel a bit hostile to "normals" yourself, if you had to go
through eaternal life as a "bookman".>>
To those of us who aren't walking books, that life may seem awful, but
the inhabitants of Bookville seem to like it very much. Indeed, they
apparently feel that they're a higher form of life since Jam and his
friends are "insignificant" and "miserable misshapen creatures" [152].
They even treat eternal life as a benefit of being a book, rather than
of being in Oz: "Didn't you know that books live on and on and on?"
[144]
Three episodes in a row--the arrival of Spots, Bookville, and
Icetown--make villains of characters who dislike creatures different
from themselves or from what they're used to. The band of protagonists,
on the other hand, is a motley crew who all like their special
qualities. And in case we don't get the lesson, Cosgrove spells it out
for us in the first conversation with Spots.
Since the Rhyming Dictionary ends up leaving his community, that
indicates that some books are open. The Bookville ideology or style of
life is the problem, but simply taking that form of life doesn't
necessarily produce hostility.
J. L. Bell JnoLBell at earthlink.net

Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 13:02:37 -0700
From: "Tyler Jones" <tyler.jones at ocephx.com>
Subject: [Regalia] Tin Woodman in _Hidden Valley_
When the group arrives in Bookville, it's one of the very few times that
quadrant based authority is used, as I recall. The Scarecrow tells the
bookies that they are under the Tin Woodman's rule, as the Emperor of
the Winkies. The bookvilles are not impressed, though, and get angry
when The Tin Woodman refers to them as being "in my kingdom".
Something a little strange happens after that. Upon hearing that they
have a ruler, The Tin Woodman seems surprised that there is "another
king" in the Winkie Country. By this time, that shouldn't be so strange.
By this time in Ozzy history, they know of dozens of small communities
in Oz, many ruled by people who call themselves a king, so it's odd that
Nick Chopper should be taken aback by this.
Usually in the series, people in the irrelevant episodes are informed
that they live in Oz, and are subject to Ozma's rule, and they usually
skip the middle man (aka the quadrant ruler). Not this time, although it
didn't work too well.
Tyler Jones

Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 18:16:46 -0500
From: David Hulan <dhulan at wideopenwest.com>
Subject: [Regalia] Quadrant based authority
Ruth:
>> When the group arrives in Bookville, it's one of the very few times
>> that
>> quadrant based authority is used, as I recall. The Scarecrow tells the
>> bookies that they are under the Tin Woodman's rule, as the Emperor of
>> the
>> Winkies. The bookvilles are not impressed, though, and get angry when
>> The
>> Tin Woodman refers to them as being "in my kingdom". >
>
> Which are the few other times, do you happen to remember, and are any
> of the
> kinglets involved more impressed?
I don't know of an instance where a quadrant ruler asserted authority
over a subject ruler directly (Glinda did over the king of Jinxland via
the Scarecrow, though), but there are at least a couple of other
instances that come quickly to mind of the Tin Woodman acting
unilaterally as ruler of the Winkies: when he refused the left wing of
a yellow butterfly to Ojo, and when he took away the Winkie ferryman's
ability to understand animal speech. There may be other instances; I
haven't combed my memory.

Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 21:10:13 +0000
From: "J. L. Bell" <jnolbell at earthlink.net>
Subject: [Regalia] HIDDEN VALLEY quadrantial sovereignty
Tyler Jones wrote:
<<When the group arrives in Bookville, it's one of the very few times
that quadrant based authority is used, as I recall. The Scarecrow tells
the bookies that they are under the Tin Woodman's rule>>
The closest precedents that I can recall are that in PATCHWORK GIRL, the
Tin Woodman forbids Ojo from gaining the wing of a yellow butterfly. In
LOST PRINCESS, he's the authority who deprived the ferryman of his
ability to communicate with animals. Otherwise, Winkies seem to regard
him as a sort of celebrity--someone they're excited to greet and host
overnight, but not really a ruler.
It seems notable that in LOST PRINCESS Glinda sends the Tin Woodman with
the Scarecrow to search her own unknown regions in the south, not around
Winkie Country. And Dorothy and her party never mention the Tin Woodman
to the communities they visit in the west. It almost seems as if Glinda
and Dorothy know that Nick /doesn't/ throw his weight around in his own
empire.
It does therefore seem like a departure for the Tin Woodman and his
friends to invoke his imperial authority in Bookville. Of course, he's
on the road only to fix a problem in the *Gillikin* Country; the
grape-gatherers don't seem to have heard of any other authorities, or
they have a sort of mythic fixation on his axe felling the magic muffin
tree. So lines of authority in Cosgrove's Oz seem to criss-cross a bit
compared to earlier times. I wonder if that's because of her fond
memories of LAND, when Nick was the emperor in the west with no ruler
above him--even though he finished that book serving Ozma.
<<Something a little strange happens after that. Upon hearing that they
have a ruler, The Tin Woodman seems surprised that there is "another
king" in the Winkie Country. By this time, that shouldn't be so
strange.>>
I interpreted Nick's words on page 145--"if there is another king in my
land, I wish to know all about him"--not as surprise but as a way to
express interest in meeting this ruler without expressing any
acknowledgment of competing authority.
J. L. Bell JnoLBell at earthlink.net

Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 22:14:09 +0000
From: "J. L. Bell" <jnolbell at earthlink.net>
Subject: [Regalia] HIDDEN VALLEY communities
Phil wrote:
<<The alternative is cognitive dissidence where to mask feelings of
dispair and inferiority a being claims happiness and superiority. One
always has to take self declarations with a grain of salt.>>
And there are a lot of those declarations in the Oz books, aren't there?
Most commonly from our friends the Scarecrow and the Tin Woodman.
The difference seems to be that while each of those gentlemen is
confident that his physical makeup and attending lifestyle is superior,
neither forces it onto other people. Many Thompson and Cosgrove
communities do that, some out of hostility and fear, others out of
well-meaning ignorance. Of course, in Thompson there's also a fair
amount of the heroes forcing other peoples to change their ways.
Cosgrove's party seems to leave the isolated communities to themselves,
forcing major changes only on the Equinots.
<<>They even treat eternal life as a benefit of being a book, rather
than > of being in Oz: "Didn't you know that books live on and on and
on?" [144]
Which does suggest either ignorance or a cover-up.>>
I read this line as an allusion to the immortality of literature. We
don't know what lifespan the bookpeople would have outside Oz in another
fairyland that has no immortality spell (e.g., Ev, Hiland). Presumably
they couldn't live at all in our part of the world--unless they've
tucked their limbs and bodies into their bindings and are sleeping
quietly on our shelves right now.
J. L. Bell
JnoLBell at earthlink.net

Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 22:39:33 +0000
From: "J. L. Bell" <jnolbell at earthlink.net>
Subject: [Regalia] HIDDEN VALLEY art
Atticus Gannaway wrote:
> I don't recall anyone's mentioning so far how bad Dirk Gringhuis's
> illustrations are. No wonder he didn't use his last name. >
There was one visual effect I thought was interesting this time around:
the images on pages 47 and 259 look like a matched set. Both show the
guardian of the magic muffin tree. But they're from different sides, to
show each head, and one is in daylight and one at night. Not much to
praise, is that? (Dirk drew the muffins as what Americans call English
muffins; I wonder if that's really what Cosgrove had in mind.)
Another image that struck me, but not as favorably, was the title page
spread--the first such spread that I can remember in the Oz books. Dirk
is obviously trying to convey Terp's height by exaggerating the
perspective (as he also does on page 44). But since there's nothing near
the giant to compare to, the effect doesn't really work.
On pages 42 and 44, Terp's hand is larger than Jam, though page 43 says
only that the giant was "more than fifty feet tall." Much more, by the
looks of things.
On page 307, the intertwined "OZ" symbols show that this art must have
been flopped--i.e., printed in reverse left to right. A number of Neill
drawings went into the books upside-down, but I don't recall this
problem before. It may have been the result of a different reproduction
technology.
Finally, the cover is interesting in that it shows the Scarecrow, the
Tin Woodman, and...the Hungry Tiger. Even a book that so wants to be "a
true tale of Oz" leaves Dorothy and the Cowardly Lion off the cover. (Of
course, Cosgrove's favorite, LAND, left them out altogether.)
The cover art appears to have been adapted from the drawing on page 124
(look at the poses of the straw and tin men). Probably for simplicity's
sake, Dirk removed one child, and with her the big cat she was riding
on. The internal picture is missing Jam's handy knapsack. And on the
cover you-know-who is much more prominent, kiddo!
J. L. Bell JnoLBell at earthlink.net

Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 23:21:37 +0000
From: "J. L. Bell" <jnolbell at earthlink.net>
Subject: [Regalia] HIDDEN VALLEY timing
HIDDEN VALLEY is clearly a novel from 1950s America, with Dorothy's
yearning for "home" turned up a notch to fit a resurgent postwar cult of
domesticity. The description of Jam's mother, "hair tied up in a scarf"
for cleaning the house [18], is one stereotypical emblem of that
culture. The ranch house Dirk draws on page 300 seems to be another.
And then there's the language characters use. On page 77, Jam says, "my
mother always has...a good hot meal" for his supper. On page 230, he
wants "another good home-cooked meal" with the farm family.
"Home-cooked" is a retronym, a term developed long after the actual
phenomenon because something else--in this case, restaurant, takeout, or
frozen food--had come along and the original needed boosting. Dorothy
never wished for a "home-cooked meal"; she just was glad to find food
she could eat. If it grew on a tree, so be it.
Even more obviously reflecting the new American consumer culture, on
page 309 Percy refers to himself as "large economy size." And to think
some people find him annoying.
Another aspect of HIDDEN VALLEY's timing is the length of time the
adventure takes. According to Ken Shepherd's chronologies of the Oz
books,* HIDDEN VALLEY covers eleven days. That's long for a post-Baum Oz
book, especially one in which every day is described in some detail.
CAPTAIN SALT and WONDER CITY span more time, but skip a week or more in
the middle.
* still available to members at:

After all the hurrying in Thompson and Neill, therefore, the pace of
HIDDEN VALLEY sometimes seems almost leisurely. For instance, chapter 2
is all about Jam hearing the animals speak now that they've arrived in
Oz. That conversation, Jam's meeting with the enslaved Gillikens, and
his capture by Terp consume one day. (Or what's left of a day after
Jam's landing, though since he sleeps from darkness the night until he
lands, that presumably happens early in daylight.) That pattern
continues: one major confrontation per day, and then lights out.
With the exception of Jam and Percy's trip by kite, there's no magically
fast transportation of the sort Thompson often used to speed up her
adventures. All travel is by foot at the speed of a boy or a boy on a
tiger. And the party actually waits for hours after arriving in the
hidden valley in order to attack Terp and his tree at the right moment.
Would Thompson have stood still for that?
I'm not saying that HIDDEN VALLEY /feels/ notably slow in the telling.
Rather, Cosgrove spreads out her events over more consecutive days than
her immediate predecessors. One result is that she describes what feels
like a geographically larger Oz. I know David Hulan and others have done
more calculations on that issue, and I wonder how HIDDEN VALLEY fits
with other books.
J. L. Bell
JnoLBell at earthlink.net

Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 21:37:10 -0500
From: "Marcus Mebes" <baringer2k at hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Regalia] HIDDEN VALLEY art
> The cover art appears to have been adapted from the drawing on page 124
> (look at the poses of the straw and tin men). Probably for simplicity's
> sake, Dirk removed one child, and with her the big cat she was riding
> on. The internal picture is missing Jam's handy knapsack. And on the
> cover you-know-who is much more prominent, kiddo!
Ah yes! John pointed out my most FAVORITE (dripping with sarcasm)
illustration from that book. Notice how angrily Dorothy and Jam are staring
at each other in that drawing? Did Jam just insult Aunt Em's home-cooking or
something? Brrrr!!
Marcus

Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 22:53:20 -0400
From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <xornom at hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: [Regalia] HIDDEN VALLEY Terp's height
J. L. Bell:
>On pages 42 and 44, Terp's hand is larger than Jam, though page 43 says
>only that the giant was "more than fifty feet tall." Much more, by the
>looks of things.
Since there are several references in the book to the magic muffin making
Percy "ten times" his original size, it might well be safe to assume it did
the same to Terp. This presumably means Terp's normal height was over five
feet tall, so he might have been pretty short, but perhaps still taller than
the inhabitants of the Hidden Valley who first greeted Jam (said to be
"little men, no taller than Jam"). Terp might well not be a native of the
valley.
--
I'll still be right where you left me, if you manage to forget me,
Nathan
DinnerBell at tmbg.org

Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 12:32:30 +0000
From: "J. L. Bell" <jnolbell at earthlink.net>
Subject: [Regalia] HIDDEN VALLEY problems and problem-solving
Ruth Berman commented about how <<Jam seems overly timid>>, and
wondered if the problem might be <
the adventure if the protagonist seems to think the adventures are that
frightening?>>
I'm not sure how most readers respond to Jam's fears, but I do think
Cosgrove used his and other characters' expressions of worry to make
their plights seem more dire.
On page 81 the Gillikin farmers tell Jam about immortality in Oz (they
also say Nick Chopper survived after being chopped up before WIZARD
because of that immortality). But the boy's still afraid of drowning on
pages 88-9. Later Dorothy offers the deadpan line, "I don't really want
to be murdered" [148]. Oz readers might recall that immigrants from
America may still be killable, but Cosgrove doesn't bring up that point.
She just raises the specter of death.
It also seems a bit uncharacteristic for the Scarecrow and Tin Woodman
to give way to despair in Bookville [167] and Icetown [208-9]. They've
been in worse straits.
Overall, the protagonists of HIDDEN VALLEY do a good job of thinking
their way out of the problems they're faced with. They rarely escape
simply through coincidence or unexpected magic, like many Oz book
heroes. As the Rhyming Dictionary assures us, "each companion, in his
way, contributed to win the day" [304]. And indeed they do, with the
exception of Dorothy. Cosgrove nicely spreads out the workload.
In one way I think Cosgrove shows a stronger sense of plot than her
predecessors. When they're trapped on the live raft, the Scarecrow and
his companions *trick* it into taking them where they want [223]. The
Scarecrow and the grape-gatherers *trick* Terp into going inside his
factory's smokestack [245, 255], knowing that without the muffins he'll
soon become ordinary and harmless. In both situations the heroes figure
out their antagonists' desires and weaknesses, then take advantage of
those to achieve their goals.
We rarely see that sort of solution in the Oz books. Instead, conflicts
are usually resolved with overwhelming magic or other force and/or lucky
breaks. The closest precedents for trickery that I can think of are the
way Ozma and the Wizard make villains drink from the Fountain of
Oblivion in EMERALD CITY and MAGIC. In both those cases, they use magic
to create a desire that the villains otherwise wouldn't have.
That said, I thought the Scarecrow's idea to use of "mass hypnotism" to
overcome the guardian of the magic muffin tree comes out of a deep left
cornfield [263-6]. The Scarecrow has only a cursory notion of hypnotism,
and no apparent experience with it; he seems to think it's part of
regular sorcery. The idea that a circle of light would make the beast's
brain susceptible to personality-changing suggestions is, well,
optimistic. There's some logical problem-solving in that scene as the
characters realize their vulnerabilities (shining in the moonlight,
dealing with two heads) and figure out solutions. But it still seems
like a stretch to me.
Simple momentum seems to drive that part of the heroes' plan, anyway.
Chopping down the magic muffin tree is what the grape-gatherers dreamed
of, and why they fixed on the Tin Woodman as their rescuer, but once
Terp is confined and shrinking, once the guardian of the tree is no
longer nasty, does the tree still need to be destroyed? Of course, if it
remained, Terp or others might pick some muffins, become giants, and
exploit smaller people again. But the pattern in many Baum and Thompson
denouements is for people from the Emerald City to confiscate villains'
magic, not destroy it.
J. L. Bell JnoLBell at earthlink.net

Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 19:59:17 +0000
From: "J. L. Bell" <jnolbell at earthlink.net>
Subject: [Regalia] HIDDEN VALLEY in proportion
Nathan DeHoff wrote:
<<Since there are several references in the book to the magic muffin
making Percy "ten times" his original size, it might well be safe to
assume it did the same to Terp.>>
In her afterword to the Oz Club edition of HIDDEN VALLEY, Cosgrove
wrote, "I worked with white rats in the laboratory. They are...a very
necessary part of medical research. Without the help of such laboratory
animals, we'd never be able to develop new cures for old and new human
maladies." So she probably did envision the magic muffin working the
same on Percy as on Terp.
Lately I've read about scientists discovering that lab rats like Percy
can respond quite differently to some chemicals from how humans do. So
that assumption might not be entirely safe.
J. L. Bell JnoLBell at earthlink.net

Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2004 12:34:47 EDT
From: AGannaway7 at aol.com
Subject: [Regalia] HIDDEN VALLEY follow-ups
Over the past couple of weeks, there have been several responses to my HIDDEN
VALLEY comments of September 1 that I've neglected to acknowledge.
On 9/2/04, Ruth Berman wrote:
<<AGannaway7 at aol.com wrote:
> I don't recall anyone's mentioning so far how bad Dirk Gringhuis's
> illustrations are. No wonder he didn't use his last name. >
How do you feel they compare to Frank Kramer's? I think Dirk's are slightly
more attractive. Neither one seems to have the grace or humor of Denslow and
Neill, though.>>
In an issue of THE BAUM BUGLE
dedicated to Jack Snow (Autumn 1988, if memory serves), one article talked
about Snow's less-than-ecstatic response to Kramer's illustrations for MAGICAL
MIMICS. He opined, I think, that the humans looked wooden and that Kramer
seemed to have trouble with the animals, as well. (I suppose Kramer was
well-suited to depict the actually wooden characters, at least, in that book.)
Snow did think, apparently, that SHAGGY MAN was an improvement, but I'm not
entirely sure whether I agree; there were some nice flourishes in the depictions
of Ozana's Story Blossom Garden, in my opinion, and I can't recall similar
visual standouts in SHAGGY MAN.
Nevertheless, I'd place Kramer above
Dirk, if for no other reason than that his style is significantly closer
to Neill's, and I've always been a Neill fan. Whether Kramer's was a conscious
Neill imitation isn't an issue with me. Dirk, on the other hand, employed that
slightly crudish children's illustration style that I associate strongly with a
certain school of the '50s. I like that style in now-kitschy vintage
advertising of that period, but I don't like it in an Oz book.
On 9/10/04, J. L. Bell had a couple of points. First:
>>Atticus Gannaway wrote:
<<The Bookville incident also made me think of another kangaroo court
that padded the ending of DOROTHY AND THE WIZARD IN OZ.>>
Eureka's trial doesn't strike me as leaping to the level of a "kangaroo
court" since everyone in the Emerald City, Ozma most of all, seems eager
to be fair and just. They just aren't very practiced at it, producing a
lot of ridiculousness. The Queen of Hearts, the Bookvillains, and the
authorities in Kafka seem to hop to a guilty verdict much more quickly.>>
This is a good point; I used the term "kangaroo court" carelessly, possibly because my memory of DOROTHY AND
THE WIZARD is slightly dim. It isn't a favorite reread of mine. But there are
still certain thematic parallels in my mind as far as laughable administration
of justice.
And then this:
<<<<Cosgrove Payes noted in her afterword for the Oz Club's edition of
HIDDEN VALLEY that an advertising man at Reilly & Lee added the
'50s-isms ("Golly!" and whatnot) to the dialogue. The author clearly
disliked those embellishments, and commented that she'd never in her
life heard a child say "Golly.">>
Cosgrove credits Reilly & Lee head Frank O'Donnell himself with revising
her first chapter (or at least with sending the revision to her). That's
the chapter in which Jam says, "Golly!" I think other phrases reveal
that HIDDEN VALLEY dates from post-WW2 America, but none sounds quite so
manufactured.
The following month, Cosgrove writes, she learned the firm "had asked
Robert Peck, an advertising executive..., to go over the poetry." The
verse stays nicely metrical until Scraps's verse on page 294--nearly the
very end of the book. And then it gets back on track for the Rhyming
Dictionary's long speech. Oddly, considering this special attention to
the verse "in house," there's a typo on page 179 ("be" for "he").>>
I'm sure you're right; I was using my imperfect recollection of Cosgrove's afterword, which I hadn't read in years; my copy of
HIDDEN VALLEY has been in storage since I moved to New York. I can see why I
remembered an advertising man, though. But I'm glad people with readier access
to these materials are around to keep me honest!
Incidentally, I remember being similarly struck by the false-sounding tone of a few bits of dialogue in
that recent '50s-fest film FAR FROM HEAVEN, which I did like a lot--though it
was jarring initially to hear Julianne Moore say, "Jeepers!" In the
case of that film, the story was able to transcend the inherent
"corniness" of its style at a certain point. These are fine lines.
Atticus Gannaway

Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2004 21:25:36 +0000
From: "J. L. Bell" <jnolbell at earthlink.net>
Subject: [Regalia] HIDDEN VALLEY follow-ups
Atticus Gannaway wrote:
<hadn't read in years; my copy of
HIDDEN VALLEY has been in storage since
I moved to New York.>>
Yes, I have the advantage of not having moved homes for a while. So what
keeps my from some of my books is the other books piled on top of them.
I'm fairly sure I have a copy of BEFORE OZ, for instance. I remember
seeing it once--just not in the last three years.
I was struck by Cosgrove's memory of Frank O'Donnell sending her a
rewrite of her opening chapter after she'd already rewritten it to
replace the original rocket trip. She doesn't mention similar work on
any other chapter. Did O'Donnell focus on that chapter because an
opening is so important to a book?
There are some significant storytelling differences between Cosgrove's
original and what appeared in the book: a quicker introduction of Jam, a
daytime takeoff instead of departure at night, less worry about being
"naughty." But Cosgrove may have made those changes in her intermediate
version, still unpublished. The only change she notes in the publisher's
rewrite is the "Golly!"
<tone of a few bits of dialogue in that recent '50s-fest film FAR FROM
HEAVEN, which I did like a lot--though it was jarring initially to hear
Julianne Moore say, "Jeepers!" In the case of that film, the story was
able to transcend the inherent "corniness" of its style at a certain
point.>>
And part of that movie's artistry was its "corniness."
After our conversation about Jam's "Golly!" I was sensitized to Robin
Brown's exclamations in MERRY GO ROUND. In the few chapters I've read so
far [doubt I'll finish by the 20th], the McGraws give us:
* "For heaven's sakes" [4]
* "Jeepers W. Creepers!" [10]
* "Well, my goodness." [22]
In my fiction I have Dorothy exclaim, "Fiddle!" when she's frustrated.
But even that might have been too strong for Reilly & Lee.
J. L. Bell
JnoLBell at earthlink.net

Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 20:10:55 -0700 (PDT)
From: Alan Wise <alanmacwise at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Regalia] HIDDEN VALLEY follow-ups
--- AGannaway7 at aol.com wrote:
> Dirk, on the other hand, employed that slightly
> crudish children's illustration
> style that I associate strongly with a certain
> school of the '50s. I like
> that style in now-kitschy vintage advertising of
> that period, but I don't like
> it in an Oz book.
Dirk's art, I think, can be a stumbling block in
enjoying HIDDEN VALLEY as a book, but especially as an
Oz book. I have a certain nubulous set of criteria
for what makes a book "Ozzy" to me and often the
illustrations can tip a book one way or the other.
Growing up, my only copy of LAND was an edition
published by Octopus Press, and the illustrations in
it were sketchy and dark, and the characters all
looked so wrinkled and drab, as though they had been
shoved in someone's pocket for a week. Consequently I
never liked LAND very much, and to this day, rarely
return to it. The Mimics in Frank Kramer's art are
all very disturbing, and combined with Snow's text and
Kramer's inablilty to draw most of the Oz celebrities
with much felicity, makes reading MAGICAL MIMICS a
difficult go. On the other hand, Neill's work in ROAD
and DOT&WIZ makes somewhat unsuccessful books some of
my Ozzy favorites simply by the detail he adds.
Dirk's illustrations, I think, have some charm to
them, and yet they don't look very much how I imagine
Oz. Clearly he had some reference to Neill's
conception of many of the characters, but there's
something neutered about them under his pen, and they
rarely, in Emily Dickinson's phrase, "breathe."
Dorothy seems to be a prime example of this. Dirk has
drawn her as a very pretty, very bland girl of the
1950s. Neill's Dorothy, although she changed so much
over the forty years of his career, has always seemed
real to me, an acutal little girl. I think in
particular of the illustrations in LOST PRINCESS and
of one picture especially in OZMA of Dorothy
frustrated and stomping away from the Nome King. (Of
course Dirk may not be entirely to blame; as I
mentioned before, Cosgrove's Dorothy doesn't seem much
like herself in the text either.)
As John Bell pointed out, the magic muffins don't look
much like muffins at all, and as Eric Shanower wrote
in the BUGLE once (an article about illustrating Oz
books; I don't have the issue at hand), Dirk's Percy
doesn't look much like a rat. Nor do any of his
animals look convincingly real.
But maybe I'm too picky about the art in Oz books.
Neill's work certainly raised the bar quite high. I
can find indivdual pictures or parts of pictures to
admire in both Kramer and Dirk, and like Dick Martin's
illustrations for MERRY GO ROUND, but not his for
YANKEE. I guess it's a matter of individual taste, or
maybe how the text interacts with the art.
Alan Wise

Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 20:23:20 -0700 (PDT)
From: Alan Wise <alanmacwise at yahoo.com>
Subject: [Regalia] HIDDEN VALLEY Dorothy
Is HIDDEN VALLEY the first time we see an actual
physical description of Dorothy?
"In a moment a lovely little girl with golden hair
entered the room, followed by the oddest character yet
seen by Jam or Percy." (p 116)
I remember a letter written by Thompson (reprinted
perhaps in the afterword to the Club's edition of
OZOPLANING) where she relayed the fears of children
who objected to Judy Garland as Dorothy because her
hair was dark instead of light, but did Thompson ever
say as much in any of her books? I know Baum kept
away from defining Dorothy too concretely, hoping to
keep her universal.
It seems stange that Baum, who could be quite sketchy
with details at times, could create the most specific
and natural of his characters while leaving much of
her appearance blank.
Alan Wise

Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 14:04:48 -0500
From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at umn.edu>
Subject: [Regalia] dirk and kramer
Atticus AGannaway7 at aol.com, Alan Wise <alanmacwise at yahoo.com> and Ivan Van
Laningham <ivanlan at pauahtun.org> --
Interesting set of discussions on problems with Dirk's (and Kramer's) Oz
art. It occurs to me that there's a kind of Dick-and-Jane flavor to Dirk's
drawings of children -- which might even have been something R&L at the time
thought would be desirable, as Evelyn Coppelman's illos over at
Bobbs-Merrill for "Wizard" and "Magical Monarch of Mo" had been quite
successful (and although the D&J illos were uncredited, I would imagine that
people in publishing knew at the time whose they were, although I think the
obituary notices when she died recently were the first time she was credited
publically). But Dirk's non-Oz art doesn't include anything that's well
known (if I'm recalling correctly, he did a lot of textbook and coloring
book illos, and a lot of Michigan-local work), and I don't think Kramer's
does, either, although I don't recall details. Maybe both of them were
selected for being local artists and probably cheaper than better known but
geographically distant artists living out east and working with the NY
publishers. (Chicagoan Dick Martin was also a local artist -- although his
Oz artwork seems to me, and apparently to most Oz fans, vastly better than
Kramer's and Dirk's.)
Ruth Berman

Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 16:18:48 -0400
From: "Nathan Mulac DeHoff" <xornom at hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: [Regalia] HIDDEN VALLEY Dorothy
Alan Wise:
>Is HIDDEN VALLEY the first time we see an actual
>physical description of Dorothy?
>
>"In a moment a lovely little girl with golden hair
>entered the room, followed by the oddest character yet
>seen by Jam or Percy." (p 116)
>
>I remember a letter written by Thompson (reprinted
>perhaps in the afterword to the Club's edition of
>OZOPLANING) where she relayed the fears of children
>who objected to Judy Garland as Dorothy because her
>hair was dark instead of light, but did Thompson ever
>say as much in any of her books?
I can't remember whether Thompson ever referred to Dorothy's hair color.
She does say in WISHING HORSE that Dorothy has blue eyes, however.
--
I'll still be right where you left me, if you manage to forget me,
Nathan
DinnerBell at tmbg.org

Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 23:18:18 +0000
From: "J. L. Bell" <jnolbell at earthlink.net>
Subject: [Regalia] HIDDEN VALLEY and other art
Alan Wise wrote:
<for what makes a book "Ozzy" to me and often the
illustrations can tip a book one way or the other.>>
This reminds me of how I felt when reading WICKED WITCH, the first new
Oz book published in a long time that came close to the original
editions' size, format, and illustration program. I felt I was reading a
"real" Oz book again for the first time since childhood.
I'd read the Oz Club's four previous books, but their larger, softcover
format just didn't feel the same. (Neither did LAUGHING DRAGON, for that
matter.) I hadn't read any Emerald City Press or Buckethead/TOTCLAF
titles at that point, so they didn't factor into my impression then. I
certainly like some of those books' illustrations and formats more than
others.
Even now, I find the look and feel of a new Oz book to be a factor in
how I respond to it. Print-on-demand publishing makes it relatively easy
for any Oz *manuscript* to be published. But an Oz *book* should ideally
have professional-quality illustrations as well. For the same reason, we
at OZIANA have tried to include illustrations of some sort with every
item in the last three years.
<<Clearly [Dirk] had some reference to Neill's
conception of many of the characters, but there's
something neutered about them under his pen, and they
rarely, in Emily Dickinson's phrase, "breathe."
Dorothy seems to be a prime example of this. Dirk has
drawn her as a very pretty, very bland girl of the
1950s. Neill's Dorothy, although she changed so much
over the forty years of his career, has always seemed
real to me, an acutal little girl.>>
Kramer, Dirk, and Martin all draw Dorothy wearing a rather frilly dress,
often with what seems like a well-starched petticoat. I don't think a
lot of American girls of her age were wearing quite that costume on a
daily basis in the 1940s through early 1960s, judging by photos and
clothing catalogues. These post-WW2 artists seemed to be drawing an
old-fashioned girl rather than a contemporary one--in other words, they
were drawing Dorothy as Neill had drawn her.
Neill, in contrast, changed Dorothy's style of dress over the decades.
As a result, he seems to have kept drawing an active little girl (albeit
one whose features looked an awful lot like most other children in
Neill's art) while his successors tried to draw a drawing. Martin's
MERRY GO ROUND art brought more life to Dorothy in my eyes than its
immediate predecessors in my eyes, but still came out a bit flat.
<<I...like Dick Martin's
illustrations for MERRY GO ROUND, but not his for
YANKEE.>>
I've heard that Martin put less effort into his Oz Club books,
particularly ENCHANTED ISLAND, than into MERRY GO ROUND. Of course, he
was probably being paid less and may have been at a different point in
his career and style. Many of the illustrations in ENCHANTED ISLAND are
simple silhouettes, and many of those are copied onto the cover. I
understand Fred Meyer urged Martin to put more effort into his last two
Oz Club Oz books, and authoring one of them probably spurred him on as well.
<<Is HIDDEN VALLEY the first time we see an actual
physical description of Dorothy?>>
I noted the "golden hair" since I didn't recall that being specified
before. That of course is based on Neill's characterization more than
Baum's or Denslow's, and shows the art's influence on Cosgrove.
Baum mentioned Dorothy's height a couple of times, but I don't think he
offered many more physical details. Partly because she's so active and
talkative, readers don't need many visual clues to get a sense of her.
It's tempting to say readers like to identify with her *because* Baum
left out a lot of identifying detail, but readers seem able to identify
with some characters who are very clearly define phyically (e.g., the
HARRY POTTER kids), so I don't think that's decisive.
Ivan Van Laningham wrote:
<artists Reilly & Lee could have picked, but these two were the best they
could find? Were they someone's brothers-in-law, or what?>>
I'm especially curious about why Reilly & Lee didn't contract with Frank
Kramer for HIDDEN VALLEY since it was published only two years after
SHAGGY MAN. Surely they couldn't have lost his phone number in that
time. And I don't think he did a terrible job; he wasn't Neill, but he
sure wasn't Dirk. The firm might not have wanted to meet Kramer's price,
or the book's fast schedule (contract offer to Cosgrove in April 1951,
copies off press in early November, according to her afterword) might
not have fit his other jobs.
J. L. Bell
JnoLBell at earthlink.net

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 09:02:29 -0500
From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at umn.edu>
Subject: [Regalia] p.s. on kramer
I speculated that Kramer might have been a local Midwestern artist -- but he
wasn't. Snow's entry on him in WWinOz says that he lived in Brooklyn and did
mostly magazine illustrations, especially sports illustrations. Sounds kind
of an odd background for picking someone to do a children's book, so a
likely explanation is still to seek. (Being someone's relative, as Ivan
suggested, is possible, but with a staff in Chicago and a Brooklyn artist,
it doesn't sound the most likely.)
Ruth Berman

Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2005 11:53:31 -0700 (PDT)
From: Scott Hutchins <scottandrewhutchins at yahoo.com>
Subject: [Regalia] Hidden Valley
I read it yesterday and today. I think it's interesting that Greene and
Martin called Spots one of the best new characters and Percy one of the
worst. It makes me wonder what their standards were: concept or
execution and development, or if they were just going on personal
preference. Spots is a cipher who hardly makes any contribution to the
story.
Overall, I thought this was an OK Oz book, but it could have been a lot
better. The Equinots had potential to be interesting characters, sort of
like Native Americans, particularly given Jam's cowboy motif, but nothing
particularly interesting happens with them. Much of the wording and
phrasing sounds like it came out of a how-to book for writing of children's
books or one of the many picture books that was read to me as a child,
something I didn't feel was the case in any of the Oz books up until now, even
the worst (Neill) ones. I guess this isn't to surprising given the
attitutude she expressed when she said "Oz is for kids!" in _Oz: The
American Fairyland. This book certainly doesn't make me want to read her
romance novels, but perhaps _Wicked Witch_ will.
In the afterword, she says that as of that time (1991), she had written 42
books. Does anyone have a complete list? Amazon lists only the
following:
The Candystripers (A Candlelight Romance)
Satan's Mistress
Bride of Fury
The Dark Towers of Trelochen
Love's Charade
Moment of Desire
Love's Promenade
The Hidden Valley of Oz
Not for Glory
The Coach to Hell
The Silent Place
Lady Alicia's Secret
Emeralds and Jade
Malverne Hall
Linda's Gifts
Designs for Love
The Wicked Witch of Oz
Love's Renegade
The Black Swan
O Charitable Death
Sapphire Legacy
Long Journey Home
(as E.L. Arch)
The Man with Three Eyes
The Double-Minded Man
The First Immortals
The Deathstones
That's 26 that they list. Not surprisingly, after the Oz books, the
science fiction books are the most expensive (over $100), while the romances
can sometimes be had for under $1, not including shipping.
Scott
Scott Andrew Hutchins

"I think one of the main faults in cinematography comes from the fact that
people never consider a variety of ways of launching a film, and force young
people to do old people's work and take on old habits, or otherwise their films
will stay in a trunk and never come out."--Jean Cocteau, trans. Robin Buss

Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 13:37:30 EDT
From: Johnfricke at aol.com
Subject: Re: [Regalia] Re: Regalia Digest, Vol 12, Issue 15
Ah, but Spots is extremely Ozzy in concept...and can delight (especially
young readers) on a number of levels.
Paramount among these, I think, is the reality of the character versus a
play on the standard phrase, "A leopard can't change its spots." The equal to
that comes with the idea (heavy on whimsical charm or charming whimsy; take
your pick) that this leopard changes his spots to match to mood or comment upon
the conversations of its compatriots.
Major? No. Lightweight and amusing and thought-provoking and engaging and
fun for a young audience. Definitely.
And evidently at least significant enough to spur on a discussion among
so-called adult thinkers, fifty-odd years after the fact.

Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 14:56:10 -0500
From: "Ruth Berman" <berma005 at umn.edu>
Subject: [Regalia] changing of spots
Johnfricke at aol.com wrote:
> Ah, but Spots is extremely Ozzy in concept...and can delight (especially
> young readers) on a number of levels. Paramount among these, I think, is
> the reality of the character versus a play on the standard phrase, "A
> leopard can't change its spots." The equal to that comes with the idea
> (heavy on whimsical charm or charming whimsy; take your pick) that this
> leopard changes his spots to match to mood or comment upon the
> conversations of its compatriots. Major? No. Lightweight and amusing and
> thought-provoking and engaging and fun for a young audience. Definitely.
>
A delightful play on the old saw, and maybe the humor in the name is strong
enough to justify the "one of the best new characters" labeling -- all the
same, though, the character doesn't actually get to do much in the story and
doesn't have much personality. (Unlike Percy, who has lots of personality,
most of it irritating?) So I think Scott is right in calling Spots a
"cipher," but the "one of the best new" label has some
justification.
Ruth